PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1104.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Oct 1, 2008
Information Technology Investment Oversight Enhancement and Waste Prevention Act of 2008 - Expands the requirement that each head of an executive agency identify, in strategic information resources management plans, any major information technology acquisition program, or any phase or increment of such program, that has significantly deviated from the cost, performance, or schedule goals established for the program. Defines "significantly deviated" as earned value management variance that is at least 20% from the original baseline established at the commencement of an information technology acquisition program.
Requires each Chief Information Officer of a federal agency to: (1) identify its major IT investments that are most critical; and (2) designate those most mission critical IT investment projects as core IT investment projects or core projects after considering specified factors. Defines "IT investment project" as an information technology system or acquisition that: (1) requires special management attention due to its importance to the mission or function of its agency; (2) is for financial management and obligates more than $500 million annually; (3) has significant program or policy implications; (4) has high executive visibility; (5) has high development, operating, or maintenance costs; (6) is funded through other than direct appropriations; or (7) is defined as major by the agency's capital planning and investment control process.
Requires the project manager for an IT investment project to submit a report to the Chief Information Officer not later than 14 days after the end of each fiscal quarter (or upon making a determination that a project has significantly or grossly deviated since the issuance of any quarterly report) that includes: (1) a description of the cost, schedule, and performance of such projects; (2) the original and current project cost, schedule, and performance benchmarks; (3) the quarterly and cumulative cost, schedule, and performance variance related to each project; (4) any known, expected or anticipated changes to project schedule milestones or project performance benchmarks; (5) the current cost, schedule, and performance status of all projects previously identified as significantly deviated or grossly deviated (i.e., more than 40% variance from the original baseline); and (6) any corrective actions taken.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Chief Information Officer, upon receiving such a report, to: (1) determine if any project has significantly or grossly deviated and report such determination to the agency head; (2) report any such significant or gross deviations to appropriate congressional committees, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Government Accountability Office (GAO); (3) develop and implement a remedial action plan to address gross deviations; and (4) establish a program to improve the information technology processes overseen by the Chief Information Officer.
Requires the Administrator of the Office of Electronic Government and Information and Technology at OMB (the E-Gov Administrator) to establish an IT Strike Force to assist agencies in avoiding significant and gross deviations in the cost, schedule, and performance of IT investment projects and take specified actions to avoid or reduce such deviations.
Requires the OMB Director to include in the annual report to Congress on the Benefits of E-Government Initiatives a summary of the composition and activities of the IT Strike Force and its effectiveness.
People & committees
Sen. Carper, Thomas R. [D-DE] · D–DE
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1104.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs referred to Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services, and International Security.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S7929-7932)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S7929)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.3384 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.3384 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.3384 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.3384 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.